Social impact of tennis and padel: 5.82 billion euros

Every euro invested in tennis and padel activities generates 4.07 euros in social benefits for the society. This amounts to 5.82 billion euros that do not pass through market accounts but can be measured through a social impact analysis.

Study objectives and type of analysis

The 2025 Tennis and Padel Report, prepared by the Research Center of the Italian Tennis and Padel Federation (FITP), brings together multiple analyses on the system of these two disciplines.

One concerns economic impact: 8.7 billion euros including direct, indirect, and induced effects, with 63,091 jobs created or maintained, according to BCG estimates. This analysis measures spending and its ripple effect throughout the economy.

Part of the value produced by sport does not appear in that account. Fewer hospitalizations, more productive workers, more focused students, stronger social relationships, a healthier body: these are real, monetizable benefits that social impact analyses can quantify.

OpenEconomics conducted the social impact analysis of the two disciplines for the Report, with three objectives.

- Monetizing social benefits: translating the effects of tennis and padel on health, productivity, and well-being into euros.

- Calculating the return on investment: comparing the system's benefits and costs using the Social Return on Investment (SROI).

- Disaggregating the social impacts of individual disciplines: measuring tennis and padel separately, in addition to their aggregate value.

What does the SROI indicator measure? It compares the net present value of the social benefits generated by an activity with the net present value of the costs incurred to carry it out. The result indicates how many euros of benefits the community, in its broadest sense, receives for every euro invested.

In addition to the SROI analysis, the study also includes an ESG rating of the system and an estimate of the benefit to the National Health Service.

Results: the social impact of tennis and padel by discipline

The study confirms the social relevance of the two disciplines, which had already emerged in previous analyses, including the most recent ones on the social impact of the Internazionali BNL d’Italia and the Nitto ATP Finals.

Overall social impact: 5.82 billion and an SROI of 4.07

Together, tennis and padel generate €5.82 billion in social benefits. Every euro spent on their activities returns 4.07 to the community: an indicator that makes the social value of the system readable and comparable with other investments.

The ESG rating completes the picture with an AA+ (85.22 out of 100). Governance is the strongest component (AAA, 90.04), followed by the social dimension (AA+, 84.76) and the environmental dimension (AA+, 80.86).

Read alongside the 8.7 billion in economic impact, these numbers give substance to the public debate: sport ceases to be an expense and becomes an investment with a return measured on two levels, economic and social.

Focus on tennis: SROI of 4.78

The sport of tennis alone generates 4.54 billion in social benefits, 78% of the total, with an SROI of 4.78. The ESG rating is also higher than the system average: AA+ with 89.16 out of 100 and a governance rating of AAA (91.87).

This data is supported by solid health evidence. According to the Copenhagen City Heart Study, tennis is the sport associated with the greatest increase in life expectancy, up to +9.7 years, with a 47% reduction in total mortality and a 56% reduction in cardiovascular mortality. A high-intensity practice that is accessible to all ages and sustainable for many years: this is the combination that explains such a high return.

Focus on padel: SROI of 2.66

Padel generates 1.28 billion in social benefits, with an SROI of 2.66 and an AA+ ESG rating (81.28 out of 100). Every euro invested still returns more than two and a half.

Why does padel yield less than tennis? The gap should be viewed in light of the phase the sport is currently undergoing. 40% of padel's economic impact comes from sports infrastructure, a sign of a system still under construction: many new courts, costs concentrated in the present, and benefits that accrue with use.

A lower SROI does not indicate a less useful investment. In this case, it indicates a younger investment. For those financing or authorizing new facilities, the comparison suggests viewing the social return dynamically, monitoring it over time, rather than stopping at a snapshot of a single year.

‍

Value for the National Health Service: a new indicator

A specific section of the study focuses on public health benefits: the analysis translates these into a reduction in healthcare spending, which can be compared across different disciplines.

The method combines the reductions in disease risk documented in scientific literature with the cost of avoided hospitalizations, valued using the Ministry of Health's DRG (Diagnosis Related Groups) rates, in accordance with MEF-NUVAP guidelines. This results in a net unit saving per practitioner, which, when multiplied by the base of practitioners, yields the benefit at a national level.

Tennis and padel rank first among the eight sports analyzed, with a benefit from healthcare savings estimated at 22.83 billion euros (17.52 for tennis alone). Gymnastics and aerobics follow (17.95 billion), then soccer (15.45) and swimming (14.19).

This top ranking does not depend on the number of practitioners. It depends on the benefit per individual practitioner: 3,870 euros, 50% more than the second-ranked sport for unit savings, swimming (2,581 euros).

For those planning healthcare and sports spending, the implication is concrete: a sports facility can also be evaluated as an investment in prevention, with a return that can be estimated in terms of costs avoided for the public system.

Key takeaways
‍

- Social value becomes a number: even benefits that do not pass through the market can be expressed in euros, and a federation can present them to institutions and sponsors alongside economic data.

- The average must be broken down: the gap between the 4.78 for tennis and the 2.66 for padel matters to those allocating resources between disciplines and facilities, and should be interpreted in light of the maturity level of each discipline.

- The return changes over time: disciplines in an expansion phase must be monitored, not judged on a single year.

- Health is the most measurable metric: savings per practitioner open a dialogue between sports policies and healthcare budgets, two areas that rarely communicate today.

- Using indicators: the study's data provide a concrete argument. For a federation, they serve to justify requests for resources; for an administration, to justify support for clubs and facilities; and for a sponsor, to add substance to a brand investment.

‍